To me, it's probably something I would think of if I were to pick up one of those issues and read the name, but I can enjoy the story the same way I can enjoy Jeepers Creepers or Rosemary's Baby. I personally lean toward the TS Eliot/New Criticism of approaching a work of art in and of itself and in relation to the history of that art form; not bringing in all the baggage of the artists' foibles or even crimes.

Actually, despite holding the view I do, I'm unlikely to give him any more money anyway because I don't buy trades for books I already have in floppy, which is the case for his run.

Years ago, I remember reading a gangster's confessional memoirs and all the profits went to the family of his victims. Of course, in that case it was because the work would itself would otherwise be directly profiting off convicted crime, but it was a cool solution.

And I have to admit, despite wanting to hold to a New Criticism view, I still tend to do things like read a Lovecraft story with the knowledge that both his parents were institutionalized and he had a deep fear of insanity. So too, I probably won't ever be able to pick up one of my old books and read Jones name and not think of this.

So how about that aspect? Leaving money out of it. Does it taint stuff you might already own (where the money was spent long before the conviction)?

My answer would have to be yes, but not to the extent that I won't re-read it if I wanted to.

Letting the victims profit from any further royalties is indeed a fine solution. Not applicable here, because I don't think it's possible to identify each and every one of them. But a fine solution nonetheless.

And I haven't found myself yet in a position where, going out the door, I had to decide between a Jones issue and a book by a different creative team. But I have far too many unread issues lying around to fall back on his Green Lantern issues. Maaaaaaybe Guy Gardner. But I doubt even that.

...And I haven't found myself yet in a position where, going out the door, I had to decide between a Jones issue and a book by a different creative team. But I have far too many unread issues lying around to fall back on his Green Lantern issues. Maaaaaaybe Guy Gardner. But I doubt even that.

Yeah, I know it OT, but I don't re-read comics very often. I have to really be in the mood or trying to remember some continuity to delve into the long boxes. I too have too many unread back issues and trades.

No, it's not ruined for me. Regarding Green Lantern stories, Gerard Jones is still one of my favorite writers. I also like what Mark Bright and Pat Broderick did on the artwork. As long as the stories aren't about pedophilia, I'm okay. It is really surreal that one of my favorite writers of comics winds up being probably the most notorious person to work in the industry. That revelation just came out of nowhere. It was weird.

Yeah, a character substituting another for a couple of years sure is worse than child pornography....

I assume the idea is that they feel that Vol. 3 is more tainted by things that were actually in it, not by things the writer did completely independent of it. I kind of feel the same way.

If the comic actually contained child porn (or anything that could be seen as a defense of it) I'd feel it was tainted by that. But I generally don't feel like I have to look into a writer's personal life to determine how I feel about their work, unless the objectionable parts of their personal life actually find their way INTO the work.

I assume the idea is that they feel that Vol. 3 is more tainted by things that were actually in it, not by things the writer did completely independent of it. I kind of feel the same way.

If the comic actually contained child porn (or anything that could be seen as a defense of it) I'd feel it was tainted by that. But I generally don't feel like I have to look into a writer's personal life to determine how I feel about their work, unless the objectionable parts of their personal life actually find their way INTO the work.

Most people who read comics don't know who the names on the books are. Only hardcore comic nerds do. So yeah I think major events in comic history stand out more then these people's personal lives. the masses are just now learning about Bill Finger.

2 years ago I loved Mark Waid's work. We are now just starting to hear what douche he is.

__________________ Take life with a Grain of salt and a shot of tequila!